What Happens When Policy Reviews Conflict With Congressional Schedules?
It's not a theoretical question any more, as the Senate is moving forward on foreign aid bill that will strengthen the U.S. Agency for International Development, even as the State Department is doing a significant review of how it is organized and operates that will have implications for USAID. The White House had asked Sen. John Kerry to hold off on the legislation, but, concerned over losing the support of Sen. Richard Lugar if there was a delay, Kerry moved forward anyway. I think there are a number of questions to be asked here. Was Lugar key to passing the bill, or does Kerry simply like working with him? If the former, moving forward may have made sense. Second, does the bill actively damage the work of the State review team by changing the ground from under them? If the ways it strengthens USAID aren't significant and structural, it doesn't seem like a disaster to move forward. And third, can State get an interim report on the review to the committee in a timely fashion so they can begin to review and implement the results before next summer?
I understand that it's hard to sync up the timing of agency actions with Congressional calendars, and that Senatorial relationships and prerogatives can't always be built and pursued in ways administrations would like. But the more synced up all those factors can be, the better chance the policies and changes that will be made will be stronger. That way, State and Congress don't run the risk of acting at cross purposes.
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Editor in Chief Tom Shoop, along with other editors and staff correspondents, take a fresh look at news affecting the management and operations of the federal bureaucracy.








Lugar gave the bill bipartisan credibility, which may be needed to keep moving it forward.
Anyway, I think the bill makes medium-scale changes where it really matters. Giving USAID the means to do its own strategic planning, making in-country USAID mission directors the coordinator for ALL USG aid in that country, beefing up research & evaluation on US foreign assistance- these are all things that matter, and they can be done without too much structural change. It might interfere with the State Department's review, but if it pushes reform in a favorable direction then that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Danielle Ellingston Posted Wednesday, November 18, 2009 2:04 PM